SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 21612

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MRS. SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, J
K.K.JOSEPH – Appellant
Versus
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. – Respondent
MACA NO. 3324 OF 2020 | OPMV NO.1085 OF 2017



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.RAHUL SASI, SMT.NEETHU PREM, SHRI.VIVEK.P.K
For the Respondents: SRI.P.G.JAYASHANKAR, SMT.P.K.RESHMA (KALARICKAL)

Compensation quantum in motor accident claims is upheld where factual assessments by the tribunal are deemed reasonable.

Headnote:This appeal arises from a compensation claim in O.P (MV) No.1085 of 2017, wherein the appellant sought enhancement of compensation after being injured in an accident involving a negligent driver. The tribunal awarded ₹9,98,800/- as compensation while the appellant sought ₹61,59,000/-. The court confirmed the tribunal's findings, indicating reasonable compensation under various heads based on the appellant's income as an AC mechanic. The appeal was dismissed as the awarded sum was deemed satisfactory. The court concluded that there was no reason to interfere with the lower court’s verdict.

Table of Content
1. claim for compensation following a traffic accident. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. court confirms tribunal's assessment of compensation. (Para 4)

JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the claimant in O.P (MV) No.1085 of 2017 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam, claiming enhancement of compensation. The respondent herein is the 2nd respondent before the tribunal.

2. According to the claimant, on 18.12.2016, while the claimant was riding a scooter bearing Reg.No.KL-07 BW 7803 through Thevara-Kundannoor road, an omni van bearing Reg.No.KL-39 8422 driven by the 1st respondent in a rash and negligent manner hit against the scooter and thus the claimant sustained serious injuries. The claimant approached the tribunal claiming compensation of ₹61,59,000/- which was limited to ₹50,00,000/-.

3. The first respondent/owner-cum-driver of the offending vehicle filed a written statement contending that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the rider of the scooter/claimant. It is further contended that he was having a valid driving licence and the vehicle was insured with the 2nd respondent. The second respondent/insurer filed a written statement, admitting the policy, but denying negligence and disputing the quantum of compensation claimed. The tribunal, after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, awarded a sum of ₹9,98,800/- with interest at 9% per annum as compensation under various heads against the respondent insurer. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal, the claimant has come up in appeal.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned standing counsel for the respondent insurer. 5. On a perusal of the award it is seen that the tribunal has awarded reasonable compensation under various heads. The income of the injured, who was an AC mechanic, has also been fixed at ₹15,000/-, for an accident in the year 2016. Under each head, it is seen that the tribunal has awarded sufficiently reasonable compensation. Therefore, I do not find any reason to interfere with the award passed.

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top